yes because when your learning is it easier to learn by someone just telling you something or to actually do it. that is like art you cant describe art in its true depth unless you show someone or do it so when your learning art can help to make every subject easier. also, art is everywhere you go so why not learn more about it. many jobs involve all kinds of art designers, architects, home builders so if you are not learning art then how are you supposed to get better at designing and building. one easy way make art an essential well learning.

No, I would submit that it is not a tenable position to say that Art is essential to learning. The implication there is that you cannot learn without Art, which is of course not true. Learning is, in many cases, possible in the absence of Art.

In response to your initial arguments, one at a time:

Argument 1: "yes because when your learning is it easier to learn by someone just telling you something or to actually do it. that is like art you cant describe art in its true depth unless you show someone or do it so when your learning art can help to make every subject easier."
Response 1: We can agree that it's easier to learn something by doing it rather than just being told about it ("I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand" - Confucius), but that's both irrelevant to this argument and not a contentious point. I agree that the above statement applies to Art, but you have made an illogical progression in your reasoning of the last part of this statement:

You've said A: "Learning is easier if you can actually do the thing", B: "Art is easier to learn if you see it rather than hear it described", therefore C: "You need Art to help make learning every subject an easier task". Upon inspection, C of course does not follow A and B.

Argument 2: "also, art is everywhere you go so why not learn more about it. many jobs involve all kinds of art designers, architects, home builders so if you are not learning art then how are you supposed to get better at designing and building."
Response 2: I can't see a way to spin this as relevant to the discussion, either. Art IS everywhere, but that's not what we're debating. Sure, many jobs require an understanding of Art. But again, while an art designer may well benefit in their career from an understanding of Art, what about someone who's job does not involve Art? Does a garbage disposal worker need Art to learn how to do his or her job? If the answer to this is no, we can only possibly conclude that Art is not essential to learning, as you have proposed.

Finally, Argument 3: "one easy way make art an essential well learning."
Response 3: I could be mistaken about what you mean by this because it's pretty tough to make sense out of, but I can only interpret it as saying that one easy way to get better at designing and building is to make Art a requirement in the education of people who design and build- which, often, it is. If they need it, it is already a requirement. If they don't need it, see response #2 for how this is still an invalid argument.

On the grounds that my opponent has not yet proposed an argument supporting their case, I think it's safe to say that this debate is finished. Thanks in advance to voters for their time, I would hate to see this one go to a draw!

On the grounds that my opponent has not yet proposed an argument supporting their case, I think it's safe to say that this debate is finished. Thanks in advance to voters for their time, I would hate to see this one go to a draw!